Dialogue approach and dialogue task are significantly associated, yielding four LTA study patterns¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2022 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Across 143 reviewed studies, dialogue approach and dialogue task are significantly associated (p < .0001), with four cell relationships driving the findings: low-structured sensemaking, high-structured articulation, high-structured deliberation, and dialectic deliberation. → Chrysi Rapanta & Mark K. Felton 2022

Evidence¶

Chrysi Rapanta & Mark K. Felton 2022¶

Chrysi Rapanta & Mark K. Felton. (2022). Learning to Argue Through Dialogue: a Review of Instructional Approaches. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09637-2

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review's own cross-tabulation analysis of dialogue approach × dialogue task across 143 coded studies, tested with Fisher's exact test and Cramer's V, with adjusted standardized residuals of +/−2 identifying contributing cells. The authors report the test "yielded significant results (p < .0001)"; the article prints no standardised effect size convertible to the wiki's impact scale, so impact is null. The four relationships were identified as study patterns.

"The test yielded significant results (p < .0001), with a moderate effect size ( φc =. 4 2 9 )."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Coach-based and task-based methods are the main fostering methods for LTA across studies — related
• Teacher role grows more concrete from low-structured sensemaking to high-structured deliberation and vanishes in dialectic deliberation — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• High-structured articulation studies report elaborated arguments while dialectic deliberation studies report integrated arguments — a narrower finding that bears on this claim